Update 15-01-non-ameliorable-harmful-activity.md

15-torts-and-coordination/15-01-non-ameliorable-harmful-activity.md

@@ -40,15 +40,20 @@ The burden lies with the plaintiff to show that a `NAHA` has been committed; the
 
 The defendant shall have a good defense if it can prove, concerning the harms which could allegedly be caused to 3rd parties by those entities, processes and/or substances, being utilized in the manner that they are being used, any of the following:
 
+#### Standard defenses:
+
 - That the defendant has a method of containing the 3rd party harms such that no harm can come to 3rd parties without their knowing volition, and that the defendant is carrying out said activities under the auspices of that method.
 - That the defendant has informed said 3rd parties of the harm and they have consented to be exposed to the harm (volenti non fit injuria).
 - That the defendant is undertaking said activities while maintaining at the ready, a provable method of *fully* reversing 3rd party harms should they occur.
 
->[Apologia]: Although this is strongly implied by the fact that the alleged potential harms must affect a THIRD party, make sure to find a way to make it clear that conducting non-Ameliorable activities in such a remote, isolated location as to make it impossible for the harms to affect a 3rd party; and showing the ability to fully contain the harmful effects to the confines of that remotely located property, beyond reasonable doubt, does also constitute a defense. Though in this case, the court shall order that the remote location be well walled off and that clear signs be put up to warn stray conagents to take necessary caution.
+#### Experimental defense:
 
->[Apologia]: Also make it clear that the undertaker of the `NAHA` in such a remote facility must fully disclose any leakage of the entities/substances, and provide to the `SovCBIO` branch, a full plan of the facility which discloses at minimum, the locations and known properties/nature of all dangerous entities/substances. Furthermore, the plan/design of the facility where these activities are to be undertaken must be carefully set up so as to ensure that in the event of a disaster/leak, the facility can be closed, contained, sealed and possibly systematically destroyed with the assistance of the `SovCBIO` branch.
+Furthermore, `WS` allows `NAHA` to be conducted on newly discovered entities/processes/substances whose properties are not well known, and on already discovered entities/processes/substances in new environments where their behaviour is also not well known. In such situations the defendant would be carrying out experiments while seeking to understand the potentially new behaviours, and may not have a means of reversing projected harms. In such a situation, the defendant is allowed to supply as a defense, a demonstration under a legislatively defined burden of proof (this constitution suggests that the burden be "_beyond reasonable doubt_") that the location and facilities where these activities are being carried out are:
+- Sufficiently remote and well-isolated from populated areas so that should any leakage or escape of the entities/processes/substances occur, there will be no risk of them influencing populated areas and private property.
+- Well-secured to ensure that any leakage or escape of the entities/processes/substances are confined to the private property on which the experiments are conducted and will not leak out to the surrounding plots of natural resources which are not owned by the entity conducting the experiments.
+- Designed and built with modularity as a central focus in order to ensure that modular containment of any leakage or disaster event is practical. The plan/design of the facility where these activities are to be undertaken must be carefully set up so as to ensure that in the event of a disaster/leak/escape, the facility can be closed, contained, sealed and possibly systematically destroyed with the oversight and possibly the assistance of the `SovCBIO` branch.
 
->[Apologia]: Wherever such a remote facility is constructed in order to work with entities/substances with unknown properties whose harmful effects cannot be reliably reversed, a full public disclosure of the location of the facility and the nature of the activities to be undertaken there are to be published and routinely updated every time those activities change, and at least once every 3 months; until such time that a method of fully reversing the effects of the entities/processes/substances is discovered.
+>[Apologia]: It is intentional that companies may buy up large plots of land and other natural resources and maintain large buffer zones around such properties in order to build experimental facilities and rent these facilities out to researchers, and that a whole economic ecosystem might develop around real estate whose express purpose is to facilitate cutting edge experimentation.
 
 ### Relief:
 
@@ -69,3 +74,18 @@ No government agency or government employee, while acting in their capacity **as
 ### Explicit limitation of liability to the immediate actor(s):
 
 Note that this cause of action can only be invoked against the actor(s) who is/are using the entity/substance/process in such a manner as to portend 3rd party harm. It may not be invoked against the manufacturer/producer of the input components required to produce the entity/substance/process.
+
+## `SovCBIO` containment, decomissioning and destruction:
+
+Where the defense supplied by a defendant is that the activity is in such a remote, well-isolated and well-secured location or facility that even in the absence of a method of fully reversing the harms, the harms can be contained; all such activities are subject to the oversight of the `SovCBIO` branch and:
+
+- The court shall order that the remote location be well fenced off and that clear signs be put up to warn stray conagents to take necessary caution.
+- The undertaker of the `NAHA` in such a remote facility must:
+  - Provide to the `SovCBIO` branch, a full plan and blueprint of the facility which discloses at minimum, the locations and known properties/nature of all dangerous entities/processes/substances.
+  - Fully disclose, to the `SovCBIO` branch, any leakage or escape of the entities/processes/substances **immediately** in the event of a leak or escape.
+- The undertaker of the `NAHA` in such a facility must:
+  - Consent to a full public disclosure of the location of the facility.
+  - Consent to an on-site presence of an ambassadorship from the `SovCBIO` branch.
+  - File up to date reports with the `SovCBIO` ambassadorship on the nature of the activities being undertaken and routinely update these reports every time those activities change; and file routine reports at a legislatively defined rate of regularity (this constitution suggests once every 3 months).
+
+These requirements are to be met until such time that a method of fully reversing the effects of the entities/processes/substances is discovered. When such a method is discovered, the undertaker of the `NAHA` activities shall, after demonstrating before the courts that the method is in fact efficacious, no longer be subject to the requirements of these `SovCBIO` obligations.